Jim Schacher v. Donald Dolph

Good Law
374 F. App'x 711
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 19, 201009-35425California775 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Creditor-Appellant Jim Sehaeher, administrator of the estate of decedent Patricia Sehaeher, appeals the district court’s affirmance of the bankruptcy court’s decision to impose a constructive trust on Debtor-Appellee Donald Dolph’s home in the amount of $1,840.07. As the facts and procedural history are familiar to the parties, we recite them here only as necessary to explain our decision. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . Although most of Schacher’s issues on appeal are inadequately presented for appellate review and could be deemed waived for failure to comply with our procedural rules, see Fed. R.App. P. 28; 9th Cir. R. 28-2, his arguments also fail on the merits. We reach the merits, and affirm.

Dolph was unjustly enriched only by the difference between the amount he in fact received, and the amount he would have been entitled to inherit according to the valid terms of Patricia’s will. See Phillips v. Rathbone, 194 Or.App. 90 , 93 P.3d 835, 841 (2004). To calculate the unjust enrichment, the bankruptcy court estimated the value of Dolph’s future share and gave him a present credit for it because the alternative—waiting for the mired probate…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.